Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-8rzl6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-06T10:53:31.227Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Efficiency of different selection strategies against boar taint in pigs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2013

A. M. Haberland*
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Georg-August University Goettingen, Albrecht-Thaer-Weg 3, 37075 Goettingen, Germany
H. Luther
Affiliation:
SUISAG, Allmend 8, 6204 Sempach, Switzerland
A. Hofer
Affiliation:
SUISAG, Allmend 8, 6204 Sempach, Switzerland
E. Tholen
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Breeding, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-University Bonn, Endenicher Allee 15, 53115 Bonn, Germany
H. Simianer
Affiliation:
Department of Animal Sciences, Georg-August University Goettingen, Albrecht-Thaer-Weg 3, 37075 Goettingen, Germany
B. Lind
Affiliation:
Förderverein Biotechnologieforschung e.V., Adenauerallee 174, 53113 Bonn, Germany
C. Baes
Affiliation:
SUISAG, Allmend 8, 6204 Sempach, Switzerland School of Agricultural, Forest and Food Sciences, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Länggasse 85, 3052 Zollikofen, Switzerland
*
† E-mail: ahaberl@gwdg.de

Abstract

The breeding scheme of a Swiss sire line was modeled to compare different target traits and information sources for selection against boar taint. The impact of selection against boar taint on production traits was assessed for different economic weights of boar taint compounds. Genetic gain and breeding costs were evaluated using ZPlan+, a software based on selection index theory, gene flow method and economic modeling. Scenario I reflected the currently practiced breeding strategy as a reference scenario without selection against boar taint. Scenario II incorporated selection against the chemical compounds of boar taint, androstenone (AND), skatole (SKA) and indole (IND) with economic weights of −2.74, −1.69 and −0.99 Euro per unit of the log transformed trait, respectively. As information sources, biopsy-based performance testing of live boars (BPT) was compared with genomic selection (GS) and a combination of both. Scenario III included selection against the subjectively assessed human nose score (HNS) of boar taint. Information sources were either station testing of full and half sibs of the selection candidate or GS against HNS of boar taint compounds. In scenario I, annual genetic gain of log-transformed AND (SKA; IND) was 0.06 (0.09; 0.02) Euro, which was because of favorable genetic correlations with lean meat percentage and meat surface. In scenario II, genetic gain increased to 0.28 (0.20; 0.09) Euro per year when conducting BPT. Compared with BPT, genetic gain was smaller with GS. A combination of BPT and GS only marginally increased annual genetic gain, whereas variable costs per selection candidate augmented from 230 Euro (BPT) to 330 Euro (GS) or 380 Euro (both). The potential of GS was found to be higher when selecting against HNS, which has a low heritability. Annual genetic gain from GS was higher than from station testing of 4 full sibs and 76 half sibs with one or two measurements. The most effective strategy to reduce HNS was selecting against chemical compounds by conducting BPT. Because of heritabilities higher than 0.45 for AND, SKA and IND and high genetic correlations to HNS, the (correlated) response in units of the trait could be increased by 62% compared with scenario III with GS and even by 79% compared with scenario III, with station testing of siblings with two measurements. Increasing the economic weights of boar taint compounds amplified negative effects on average daily gain, drip loss and intramuscular fat percentage.

Information

Type
Full Paper
Copyright
Copyright © The Animal Consortium 2013 
Figure 0

Table 1 Heritabilities (h2), phenotypic standard deviations (σP) and economic weights (w) per unit of considered traits (SUISAG, 2012)

Figure 1

Table 2 Heritabilities (diagonal), phenotypic (above diagonal) and genotypic (below diagonal) correlations between considered traits (SUISAG, 2012; Frieden (personal communication), 2013; Windig et al., 2012)

Figure 2

Table 3 Breeding goals and information sources of the different scenarios

Figure 3

Table 4 Transmission matrix (gene flow) within the modeled pig population

Figure 4

Figure 1 Annual genetic gain of boar taint compound androstenone (AND), skatole (SKA) and indole (IND) for different information sources: scenario I (hatched); scenario II with biopsy-based performance testing (dark gray); genomic selection (GS, light gray); and a combination of biopsy and genomic selection (black).

Figure 5

Figure 2 Variable costs in Euro for the reference scenario (I), selection against boar taint compounds via biopsy-based performance testing (II a)), genomic selection (II b)) or both (II c)), as well as for the selection against the human nose score via test individuals (III a)) or genomic selection (III b)).

Figure 6

Figure 3 Annual genetic gain (ΔG/a) in units of the trait for the human nose score (HNS) for different information sources: station testing of siblings with one test individual (white); station testing of siblings with two measurements (black); genomic selection (light gray); biopsy-based performance testing for boar taint compounds (correlated response, dark gray).

Figure 7

Figure 4 Expected changes in the prevalence of boar taint compounds androstenone (a), skatole (b) and indole (c) as a function of economic weighting: scenario I (solid line); scenario II and biopsy-based performance testing with weighting of −2.74, −1.69 or −0.99 (crosses); economic weighting increased up to a proportion of 10% (diamonds); 20% (dashed line); 30% (circles) of the variance of the overall breeding goal.

Figure 8

Figure 5 Annual monetary genetic gain in the production traits lean meat percentage (LMP), surface (SUR), feed conversion ratio (FCR), average daily gain measured on station (ADG_S), drip loss (DL) and percentage of intramuscular fat (IMF) for the reference scenario (hatched) and scenario IIa with economic weights of −2.74, −1.69 or −0.99 Euro per unit of log-transformed androstenone, skatole and indole, respectively (dark gray) and for economic weights increased up to a proportion of 10% (light gray); and 20% (black) of the variance of the overall breeding goal.